Indirect Combat Spells, Maximum of allowed successes equals Force? Options

[Uli]

SR4 p. 196
"Indirect Combat Spells are treated like ranged combat attacks; . . ."

SR4 p. 171
"A spell's Force limits the number of hits (not net hits) that can be achieved on the Spellcasting Test."

So, what do you think? Can a really well cast and/or aimed Flamethrower or Laser deal more damage? Are the hits limited? Of course, for ranged attacks, they are not.
I just had this idea, that they should not be limited, since otherwise the indirect Combat Spells remain far from a good choice. I would like to hear your opinion whether my interpretation of the rules is correct or not or if it would make a useful house rule.

[Aaron]

Hits are limited by the Force of the spell cast. My interpretation is that Indirect Combat Spells get an accuracy boost along with the extra power as Force increases. Kinda like going from an improvised pipe gun to a high-power sniper rifle.

[Uli]

That is indeed a good argument.

[Neraph]

Don't forget that spending a point of edge on the spellcasting test removes that restriction.

[Muspellsheimr]

Only for the Edge dice - which can be a pain in the ass if you use Edge for additional dice before making the roll (suggestion: use different colored dice).


One possibility to make the attack & spellcasting tests different would be to require an Agility + (Throwing Weapons?), with Spellcasting Hits as a Dice Pool bonus. This of course makes it more complicated, & probably not as good for most spellcasters - better to just stick with RAW in this case I think.

Although I am doing a similar thing for Fashion/Makeover, using Intuition + Artisan, with Spellcasting Hits as a Dice Pool modifier. I am of the opinion that a good spellcaster with no artistic view being able to create clothing or similar better than the best designers is retarded (magic makes it possible, not good); with the above, the spell remains useful, but more realistic.

[Neraph]

Only for the Edge dice - which can be a pain in the ass if you use Edge for additional dice before making the roll (suggestion: use different colored dice).

Where does it say that?

[Muspellsheimr]

This
limitation does not
apply to Edge dice
that are used to boost
a spell.

[Neraph]

Well there ya go then...

[TheOOB]

I think I would house rule that if the edge is spent before the test, all the dice count, much like how all the dice invoke the rule of 6 when edge is spent before.

[Neraph]

BBB, pg. 67, Spending Edge, first example:

You may declare the use of Edge before rolling for any one test (or one interval roll on an Extended Test). You may add a number of extra dice equal to your full Edge attribute to the dice pool. All dice (not just Edge dice) rolled on this test are subject to the Rule of Six (pg. 56)...

(emphasis added).

The next line states if you use Edge after the roll, only the Edge dice use Rule of Six.

[Fortune]

What does that have to do with 'hits' on a Spellcasting test?

[pbangarth]

What does that have to do with 'hits' on a Spellcasting test?

The Force of the spell limits hits, except for those hits generated by Edge dice. The discussion wandered into determining what exactly are Edge dice.

Peter

[Dr Funfrock]

To address the OP, look at it this way; Both direct and indirect spells have the same limit on the number of hits. Both are resisted using a single attribute (Reactions or Willpower). Whilst augmentation can bring Reactions up over normal limits, there are plenty of effects that can give a similar bonus to Willpower (Magic Resistance, or Counterspelling). In fact, a maxed out human has only 9 dice to resist Indirect spells, but a hefty 15 (6 willpower + 3 magic resistance + 6 counterspelling) to resist direct spells, and that's assuming a perfectly reasonable value for the mage providing counterspelling (4 in the skill + 2 dice bonus for a specialisation in Combat spells, which is a sensible choice for counterspelling).

The advantage for the direct combat spell is that if it does work, then the target takes full damage. The indirect spell still has a damage resistance test which gets the benefit of counterspelling dice. On the other hand the target of the indirect spell now has to meet a threshold of 10 (assuming a force 5 spell) to ignore the damage entirely. The target of a direct spell only needs a maximum of 5 hits on their test to completely shrug off the spell.

It's amazing how much the math for spellcasting changes when you throw counterspelling into the mix. It's free, it's easy, if the team sticks together it's always available, and more than anything else it's the real reason why you should geek the mage first.

[Fortune]

The Force of the spell limits hits, except for those hits generated by Edge dice. The discussion wandered into determining what exactly are Edge dice.

Yeah, I followed the conversation. It seemed to me that any confusion in regards to exactly what 'Edge dice' were, and when they apply was already cleared up.

Neraph seems to be replying to TheOOB's post about a house rule regarding Edge use in spellcasting, but his response does not seem to have anything to do with TheOOB's ruling, but merely reiterates the canon application of Edge. I still don't see how that is applicable to the topic at hand though, which was why I asked.

[Apathy]

To address the OP, look at it this way; Both direct and indirect spells have the same limit on the number of hits. Both are resisted using a single attribute (Reactions or Willpower). Whilst augmentation can bring Reactions up over normal limits, there are plenty of effects that can give a similar bonus to Willpower (Magic Resistance, or Counterspelling). In fact, a maxed out human has only 9 dice to resist Indirect spells, but a hefty 15 (6 willpower + 3 magic resistance + 6 counterspelling) to resist direct spells, and that's assuming a perfectly reasonable value for the mage providing counterspelling (4 in the skill + 2 dice bonus for a specialisation in Combat spells, which is a sensible choice for counterspelling).

The advantage for the direct combat spell is that if it does work, then the target takes full damage. The indirect spell still has a damage resistance test which gets the benefit of counterspelling dice. On the other hand the target of the indirect spell now has to meet a threshold of 10 (assuming a force 5 spell) to ignore the damage entirely. The target of a direct spell only needs a maximum of 5 hits on their test to completely shrug off the spell.

It's amazing how much the math for spellcasting changes when you throw counterspelling into the mix. It's free, it's easy, if the team sticks together it's always available, and more than anything else it's the real reason why you should geek the mage first.

As I understand it, both Magic Resistance and Counterspelling also apply to indirect spells. Can somebody tell me if I'm mis-remembering?

[Fortune]

Yes, but Counterspelling is applied at a different time with Indirect Combat spells than it is with spells from the Direct Combat class. In effect, Counterspelling with Direct Combat spells can actually assist you in avoiding the spell in the first place, whereas with Indirect Combat spells, Counterspelling basically helps to shrug off the effects after they hit you.

[Cain]

To get back on topic: If I understand the OP's question, the answer is yes. If you cast a Force 5 Fireball, and score 5 extra successes, the targets will be taking 10 damage. The same applies to Laser, and all the rest. If you spend Edge, this goes even further: those Edge dice explode, meaning there's no theoretical limit to how powerful it can be. (Hint: This is a good time to use Aid Sorcery services.)

[Neraph]

I think the point of the thread was to point out that unless you cast a high-Force Indirect Combat Spell, you're better off just shooting him.

Ex. 1) F2 Lightning bolt with 2 hits = defender needs 2+ successes to avoid a weaksauce annihilatory attempt. Better off shooting him with your gun.

Ex 2) F8 Acid Stream with 8 hits (within the realm of reason) = defender needs 8+ successes or gets reduced to sludge.

[Cain]

Someone check me on this, but don't secondary effects go off even if the main spell misses? In other words, if you throw a fireball and everybody rolls a dodge, they still might have their ammo cook off?

[Fortune]

Ex. 1) F2 Lightning bolt with 2 hits = defender needs 2+ successes to avoid a weaksauce annihilatory attempt. Better off shooting him with your gun.

With a Force 2 Lightning Bolt Spell with 2 hits, the defender would need 4 successes to totally avoid the spell's effects. As opposed to a Direct Combat spell of the same Force and number of hits, where he would only need 2 successes to avoid it entirely.

Ex 2) F8 Acid Stream with 8 hits (within the realm of reason) = defender needs 8+ successes or gets reduced to sludge.

With a Force 8 Acid Stream with 8 hits, the defender would need 16 successes to totally avoid the spell's effects.

[kzt]

Yes, but Counterspelling is applied at a different time with Indirect Combat spells than it is with spells from the Direct Combat class. In effect, Counterspelling with Direct Combat spells can actually assist you in avoiding the spell in the first place, whereas with Indirect Combat spells, Counterspelling basically helps to shrug off the effects after they hit you.

You can also use teamwork on countermagic. So if you have 5 mages each with 6 dice plus one with 8 dice you get an average of 18 dice of counterspelling. Which will typically soak 6 successes, 10 with edge. I'd recommend against using manaball against that team.

[Muspellsheimr]

With a Force 2 Lightning Bolt Spell with 2 hits, the defender would need 4 successes to totally avoid the spell's effects. As opposed to a Direct Combat spell of the same Force and number of hits, where he would only need 2 successes to avoid it entirely.



With a Force 8 Acid Stream with 8 hits, the defender would need 16 successes to totally avoid the spell's effects.

Not quite - With a Force 2 Lightning Bolt, the defender would need 2 Hits to avoid the effects entirely (counterspelling does not apply), whereas the Direct spell would require 2 Hits to avoid entirely (counterspelling does apply). That is the difference. If the spell does hit, the defender needs a total of 4 Hits (defense & resistance - counterspelling & armor applies to resistance) to avoid the effects entirely. The Direct spell does not receive the secondary resistance, & affects the target fully.

Basically, assuming availability of Counterspelling, Direct spells are easier to avoid entirely, but if they are not avoided, they will do far more damage than an Indirect spell.

[Fortune]

Yeah, I didn't quite word that the way I wanted.

[SincereAgape]

Well I'll be. After reading this thread, you learn something new everyday from Dumpshock.

[Fortune]

Just out of curiosity, what did you learn?